You can make your argument convincingly without using the first person singular. What little I've read of Red Smith comes to mind. There is nothing wrong, in principle, with using it, but it very often is used as a crutch.

I guess it's not wrong when used in a column. Personally, something about reading "I" in any story is a turn-off for me. Even in a column. Like wicked said, an argument doesn't need "I" to be convincing.

Interested in getting opinions, constructive criticisms on the "I" in columns.

Click to expand...

Before E. Except after C.

The problem I have with first-person singular isn't because it's inappropriate to denote opinion. It's that we should be able to word those opinions a little more elouqently. Better writers don't have to remind you that they're the ones writing. Weaker ones (and talk show callers and story commenters and the like) generally do. There's 100 exceptions for every rule, and there surely are in this case too. But at best, it's the sign of lesser structure and at worst, a sign of egomania (read this because I wrote it).

As a reader I'd say using "I" has a place, but only if you're talking about something that specifically happened to you, such as an anecdote of some sort. If you're writing a column about taking your kid to their first baseball game and you do backflips to avoid writing "I" then you may want to see a therapist and get some things off your chest.

Simply saying "I think" every time you're interjecting opinion though is usually a tip-off of a rushed column, to my eyes.

I was once called out by the dean of motorsports writers, Chris Economacki, for using "I" in my columns far too much. But I think "this writer" or some of the other alternatives sound clunky. Tough one.